162,496
dog and cat intakes
Reported by PACFA-licensed organizations in 2025
Independent interim evidence report · July 2026
Colorado Can Protect Every Healthy and Treatable Shelter Pet.
Colorado already demonstrates substantial placement capacity. The remaining non-live outcomes are concentrated enough to support targeted action—but statewide data cannot yet show how many involved healthy or treatable animals.
Official 2024–2025 PACFA data · Colorado Department of Agriculture
149,944
live outcomes
Adoption, return to owner, transfer, and other live dispositions
12,393
non-live outcomes
A count that does not, by itself, establish preventability
74.3%
concentrated in seven systems
9,206 of the statewide dog and cat non-live outcomes
01 · Statewide evidence
A strong statewide baseline, with a measurable gap.
Colorado’s reported dog and cat live-release rate moved from 92.75% in 2024 to 92.37% in 2025. The change is small; the more important policy question is what happened in the 12,393 non-live cases.
PACFA reports transactions, not a unique-animal census. An animal transferred within Colorado may appear in more than one organization’s intake and outcome totals.
Reported dog and cat transactions
2024 and 2025 statewide baseline
Live-release rate equals live outcomes divided by final outcomes—not live outcomes divided by intake.
2024
92.75%
2025
92.37%
Live outcomes Non-live outcomes
Concentration
Seven systems account for nearly three-quarters of the statewide count.
Screening tool, not verdict.
Large scale is not itself a failure. Compassionate leadership, effective programs and services, species and age mix, legal holds, service areas, condition at intake, and access policies can affect outcomes.
| Economic parent | Intake | Non-live | LRR | State share |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HSPPR | 24,568 | 2,870 | 88.31% | 23.2% |
| Humane Colorado | 21,689 | 2,592 | 88.03% | 20.9% |
| Denver Animal Protection | 7,717 | 1,274 | 83.41% | 10.3% |
| NOCO Humane | 10,556 | 847 | 91.91% | 6.8% |
| Riverdale | 7,076 | 751 | 89.29% | 6.1% |
| Foothills | 7,750 | 492 | 93.71% | 4.0% |
| Aurora | 3,182 | 380 | 87.98% | 3.1% |
Placement network25,103
dog and cat transfers into Colorado from other states in 2025. Transfers into the state in 2025 were lower than in each of the previous five years. The Colorado community has shown great capacity for lifesaving.
Capacity, not displacement
Colorado can reserve local capacity without ending interstate rescue.
The transfer network demonstrates the ability to transport, foster, market, treat, and place animals at significant scale. It does not prove that an imported animal directly displaced a local animal.
The scenarios below illustrate capacity; they are not causal estimates. Precise planning requires matching species, age, size, condition, timing, foster needs, and final outcomes.
5%1,255 equivalent local placements23,848 imports still possible
10%2,510 equivalent local placements22,593 imports still possible
15%3,765 equivalent local placements21,338 imports still possible
20%5,021 equivalent local placements20,082 imports still possible
02 · The central evidence gap
Statewide totals count outcomes. They do not classify the decision.
Without standardized animal-level records, the public cannot reliably separate irremediable suffering, grave safety cases, owner-requested end-of-life services, treatable conditions, healthy animals, and indeterminate cases.
Medical prognosis
Distinguishes irremediable suffering from treatable conditions.
Behavior and safety assessment
Documents observations, context, evaluator, instrument, and reassessment.
Owner-request status
Separates owner-directed end-of-life care from shelter decisions.
Custody and legal status
Shows which placement options were legally available.
Individualized outcome reason
Makes each decision auditable instead of relying on an aggregate category.
Alternatives attempted
Records treatment, foster, transfer, rescue, adoption, and safety options.
Financial evidence
Colorado shelters are well funded
Audits, complete Form 990 filings, and government budgets establish that major funders control significant public and private resources. They do not show that performance is specifically funding-related.
Fiscal periods, campuses, clinics, enforcement functions, education, capital costs, restrictions, and related entities must be aligned before organizations can be ranked by spending or efficiency.
| Economic parent | Period | Revenue | Expense |
|---|---|---|---|
| HSPPR | CY 2024 | $22.05m | $23.45m |
| Humane Colorado | FY 2024 | $19.64m | $35.97m |
| NOCO Humane | FY 2025 | $11.53m | $11.00m |
| HSBV | CY 2024 | $10.17m | $8.13m |
| Animal Friends Alliance | CY 2025 | $5.82m | $5.17m |
| Foothills Shelter | CY 2024 | $5.94m | $6.53m |
| La Plata County HS | CY 2024 | $3.21m | $3.08m |
| Soul Dog Rescue | CY 2024 | $1.86m | $1.60m |
03 · Action agenda
Six steps toward a more transparent, effective statewide system.
These recommendations follow from the verified evidence and its limits. They prioritize better decisions, stronger cooperation, measurable program reach, and public accountability.
Establish a local at-risk placement protocol
Provide timely statewide rescue and foster notice, complete records, and meaningful response time before an animal faces a non-live outcome.
Preserve interstate rescue while reserving local capacity
Use matched species, age, size, condition, timing, foster-needs, and outcome analysis to identify placement capacity for Colorado animals at risk.
Target corrective work where outcomes concentrate
Begin with the systems responsible for most non-live outcomes while controlling for intake duties, species, age, legal holds, geography, and condition at intake.
Modernize municipal contracts
Tie public funding to transparent access, reunification, rescue cooperation, treatment, foster use, outcomes, data quality, and corrective plans.
Complete the municipal financial record
Obtain final program actuals, internal billings, indirect-cost schedules, and central-service allocations before comparing costs.
Create an annual independent accountability cycle
Publish formulas, denominators, source documents, missing-data flags, and supported corrections, with a fair opportunity for organizations to respond.
04 · About the data
Definitions and interpretation rules
- System boundary
- All shelters and rescues licensed by Colorado PACFA.
- Unit of analysis
- Facility reporting row and consolidated economic parent; not necessarily a unique animal.
- Live outcomes
- Adoption, return to owner, transfer, and other documented outcomes in which the animal remains alive.
- Non-live outcomes
- Death in care, killing or euthanasia, and missing, stolen, or unaccounted-for status; categories should remain separate when available.
- Live-release rate
- Live outcomes divided by final outcomes.
- Healthy
- No medical or behavioral condition requiring rehabilitation before placement.
- Treatable
- A condition that can be cured, controlled, managed, rehabilitated, or accommodated with reasonable care and support.
- Primary objective
- Protect every healthy and treatable homeless pet entering the PACFA-licensed system.
Questions readers ask
How to read the findings
What does this report mean by Colorado’s shelter system?
All shelters and rescues licensed under Colorado’s Pet Animal Care and Facilities Act, or PACFA. Facility reporting rows are consolidated into economic parents when one nonprofit or government entity operates multiple campuses.
Does a non-live outcome mean a preventable loss?
No. The category includes death in care, killing or euthanasia, and missing, stolen, or unaccounted-for status. Statewide aggregates do not establish health, treatability, suffering, public-safety risk, or owner-request status.
Can the current data show how many healthy or treatable animals were lost?
No. That requires animal-level medical, behavior, custody, owner-request, alternatives-attempted, and individualized outcome information that PACFA’s aggregate files do not contain. A proposed study was turned down for funding during the PACFA Sunset review. Estimates show that almost half of negative outcomes could be flipped to live outcomes with a compassionate approach.
Why examine the organizations with the largest counts?
Concentration makes targeted review efficient. It is a screening method, not a verdict. Intake duties, species and age mix, enforcement responsibilities, legal holds, geography, and condition at intake must be tested rather than assumed.
Do interstate transfers prove local animals were displaced?
No. Transfer volume demonstrates a substantial placement network, not direct displacement. A causal conclusion requires matching animals by species, age, size, condition, timing, foster needs, and final outcomes.
Read the evidence
Review the full interim report and verified baseline.
The public materials include the report’s method, definitions, source register, evidence notes, financial cautions, and open research questions.